tv Syrian Refugee Crisis Panel 3 CSPAN December 14, 2015 1:59am-3:04am EST
requirements and steps the u.s. is taking to counter isis. ci are joined by frank som lluffo and john della volpe talks about a recent view on how millennial's view 2016, the fight against isis, and other topics. and caitlin emma discusses efforts by the education department to help low performing schools get better through school improvement grants. we also take our calls and look for your comments on facebook and twitter, beginning live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> next, a discussion on the syrian refugee response with germany's ambassador to the u.s. and policy fellows from the brookings institution and the migration policy institute. this was hosted by the group new america. an hour.n
record. [applause] >> a very distinguished group although she will have to step up early to catch a train for next appointment. but we will start now. >> this is a final session and we have some of very powerful than personal presentations about the scale and the depth of the humanitarian crisis and the failure of the world to respond. now having asserted the problem you can move onto
possible solutions. to have four wonderful and qualified commentators. to said that the family is waiting for her we don't want her to miss the train. but i would like to welcome the ambassador from the federal republic of germany who has an important role to play with the most responsible civic citizen in the world right now. i don't think that is an exaggeration. and the expert on the european end of the refugee crisis and then you need no
said why aren't refugees the answer? only those that are not steeped in the cynicism of politics hear you have greece and a country with all sorts of economic problems in the sense of not having the economy throughout europe looked at the rapidly aging population and that the people to support the older generation. with hundreds of millions of refugees.
and then the spending with the refugees. to jump-start the economy. ended with the spending it needs to get the economy going. so as those desperate people in terms of the public narrative with the assistance for those ticket directed benefits than the economy as a whole to have a new generation of young people. that these are desperate people. >> bell loudest voices are
the fear mongers. but ambassador, i don't hear enough for me assad is starting with the prime minister. it has spread throughout the continent -- continents because they're bringing with them the threat of isis. how much longer can your country sustain this exemplary role? so this is one of the most serious challenges with the second world war with the inception.
>> but they do not seem to be living up to their original values. >> we will come up with solutions. but we have to pull back to understand but you're a pad is experienced three major crisis financial, the debt crisis and the russian involvement of the ukraine and a cumulative effect has strained relations to the breaking point with chancellor merkle is now distrusted to do something
that we recognize as heroic but when it has been viewed as politically reckless. then i will explain why i think it is the right thing to do. but we have the of politics on the ground. but they could pick that low hanging fruit. with coming to do the crisis that is by far the most dangerous. we are lazy are not lazy. and everybody with the refugee crisis.
with the anti-immigration camps it is rarely easy to try to root tap into that. where are those parties on the rise in sweden? and bin number one but the governing coalition. so the strategic priority to help europe or germany. i can assure you it isn't the russians it has to be our strategic parity. it is in charge to scratch
your head to think why did they elect them that after months but then it switched to greece. that was one bad analysis. that we will have to take people from greece then they came up with the relocation plan that was not politically prepared today there's a total of 130 people out of a commitment of 160,000. >> you have to build the european response with that european integration you
have to support her and in europe it is a global problem. this is a global responsibility and the capacity to do that. >> why does the united states not identified this as the problem that is and it's self-interest to support european germany in a rhetorical way. >> and because of the humanitarian of the farm policy. with the pillar of the
foreign policy with what is deeply exercised. >> is simply has fallen away. as empirical. i think as the three weeks ago but didn't do it again 300 at least so she dash. but it is important to understand that they're different in their political cultures. the american failure and it is already a failure it is one of the things we talk about is of the united states government with any
longer capable of a reaction. and it will start to snow in europe. >> there are many stages. but does that rest with the traditional of the nation states? >> according to the traditional nation state and they should exemplify a zero or personify. but the boundaries should coincide but they never do. so they develop the problem of minority that europe is
so when we fail we are betraying ben nature. >> we're no longer in a position to be because that example is now one we can point to one dash. >> it is a peaceable coexistence and they come from somewhere else should be ended a jab globalization. and that we're no longer interested it is like a dead to nails in the coffin. the each played the part brilliantly. >> i said i want to do talk about in interpretation but
to recognize the reflection point mitt the entire refugee sentiment but she had to stand up work is essentially since the end of the second world war. and she felt she had to take a stand. and now she has to try to get that through europe. and to recognize that inequality that led to the crisis ended drove people to come to europe as well.
>> but her example does not seem to be spreading. and it seems to be gaining traction. so how long can that position be sustained? >> number one we wish there would be dead united states to take more syrian refugees but the most generous donors this is one of the important solutions in the adjacent country of syria.
to help that in turn all displaced persons this is about "the shock doctrine" million. and by far is the most generous donor to cater for the refugees. and of course, that goes to the root cause. and we need a the military contact. and we are grateful to secretary kerry for this initiative to establish a political process. >> now we will go and let you jump bin. >> i will leave on a more optimistic note.
because of that we will do whatever it takes. and i predict we will get a political summit. that doesn't solve everything but then allow this summer to take the pressure off. >> but i would say two things what is important is the discussion of the refugee crisis should not be incorporated and that is what is happening so with respect of emigration coming up with these people numbers
for the people to do this. precisely because it is very easy to discuss. at between 1880 and 1920 we took him 4 million immigrants from italy. and nobody in their right mind that the mafia and all the violence that are brought in those decades followed stock the a bentons of 4 billion italian immigrants who was part of the foundation of the history of this country.
but nobody is prepared that there is no security reasons. but this requires leadership >> of those who have been admitted since 9/11 so there is no basis. for those that is not running for office. to voice these things. and the most effective with a counter narrative in the mastery of the west to allow
>> it is very important not just political leaders intellectual writers. now is the time to refresh and remind people of the values you are discussing. in my real worry is that many of my values with the intellectual energy but these people have spirit. and most generally to seem exhausted and not prepared
it is about the character of our society. nothing less is being tested either by the refugee crisis or the politicians on the right who are exploiting the refugee crisis. and unless there is some formidable answer to that exploitation at the level of political discussion and political culture a few it will be a debate between energetic populace and lethargic liberals, and that won't have a good outcome. >> aunt they always more energetic? >> they are not hard to rebuke. it is not a highly intelligent doctrine, and it is not that hard to deal with, but you have to bring some passion to the ideas and debate.
>> i want to ask. >> let's get some solutions. >> one of the most troubling aspects, working with my colleagues have focused on migration, even the more liberal ones tend to be fighters and speak out about the security issues where the obviously, you know, concerns. those people are the ones who should be leading the moral argument. and that is an issue that should trouble us. the response from government, civil society and private sector should go to supporting the grassroots that have been backing the message. he is loud, he gets the headlines.headlines. in greece, germany, sweden, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of people who were there supporting taking
care of housing, feeding, playing music for, teaching refugees. they need to be supported in a massive way. >> how do you propose? i don't think anybody disputes that. how do we do that? since there is such an absence of moral or any other leadership, who can leap to five. >> each one of the groups i was here at the beginning disparate christmas and hanukkah during the holidays and reaching out to refugees. the stories are ones that get passed down through generations. we have a chance right now. act asact as the 1st answer. i also want to say the issue of refugees, the demographic argument, 25% unemployment for 50%, it has not worked in good times and certainly won't work now, but think about is the next form of nationbuilding. make the case that these of the people who will go back eventually to syria and
other countries. we have to educate them. it will -- they will be able to go back and be the engineers and journalists in syria. >> many of them already do believe. >> believe. >> absolutely. >> were talking about a secular bourgeois city. and we are not talking about people you need to be introduced to these things for the 1st time. >> but the kids can go back
or stay here and build their lives here and send remittances back that will help the societies thrive. taking care of refugees, educating the kids in particular, unaccompanied minors will be the key to solving these problems. >> you are kind of advocating that we work around our leaders. >> and through them. >> they held the keys to the kingdom. >> a little bit helpless. in this country right now i speak to democratic friends and their horrified by trump the next thing they say is isn't just give for clinton. well, it is having -- is a curse upon the united states. it is terrible for the country and is not enough to sit there and say great, the democrats get the white house and the senate. let the cancer spread because this is not the sort of thing you can call back. it is not as simple as that. >> as you know from your own history,history, mr. ambassador, once such a viruses released it is very hard to put it back in the bottle. you mentioned intriguingly the role of the internet in this whole saga
and particularly in jihad. why has the other side, our side let's say less adept at putting our message through the same means to the malcontent, most of them homegrown malcontent whether in france, belgium, san bernardino. i fear where the next one, next will take place but inevitably will. >> i referred to the smart phones as part of this migration, recruiting, recruiting tool. i'm what i want to say is now even in the remotest village in afghanistan people can learn how to make their way to germany. we are getting a lot of afghans, by the way, a lot of iraqis there are people that have lost hope.
that they will ever deliver there services are guaranteed a peace. those people, maybe 20 years ago, have instruction make it a more prosperous part of the world. the digital dimension of the migration. of course it also carries opportunities, the age of the internet, as we know, they might connect people in a beneficial way. so a commonality of certain values. can i come back to solutions here? i think, you know, we all have action on a national
level, a lot of homework of the european level, andlevel command we also have to do something on the regional and international level, basically focus our energy to stabilize those countries the iraq, syria, afghanistan, where most of the people come from. that is, of course, done with a big bang. there is no blueprint, no magic wand. along. along leading term effort. but it has to be a focus. >> nationbuilding. >> what you were talking about quite correctly is nationbuilding. but nationbuilding as a consequence of the war in iraq has been delegitimize it as an objective of american foreign-policy. if what you are saying is a must be re- legitimated and
what cannot solve this problem without addressing and social a local roots then in fact what everyone thinks about the war in iraq, it is important to understand nationbuilding may have to be restored. >> but that would take an act of courage. >> a new election at the least. >> so, one of the negative effects, europe and the inaction over the course of the 1st part of the crisis is it left -- let the left -- let the rest of the world off the hook. why should anyone do anything and support? and that is what you were hearing a lot of. we have to break that cycle. we have canada which is taken 20,000 refugees, a small country has signaled it is willing to take another hundred thousand. they are talking about the equivalent of two2 million. canada can do it. brazil has taken and quite a
few. the immediate goal must be to take the pressure off of europe. first, as you said, the support in turkey, lebanon, and lebanon, and jordan. one example of how misguided the european response was. if a year ago europe had given five,five, seven, 8 billion it would have been nothing like what we saw today. those cooling, nono schooling, no access to labor markets. this year alone your planned on spending 40 billion euros. could have spent the money a year ago and instead he spent 40 billion this year alone. >> the save zone. >> the political damage, forget the financial damage. you can't even quantify that. we have to understand why the mistakes are being made over and over.
one of the things is the question of a global system of responsibility sharing. there has to be more than what exists today which is basically a hundred thousand people, the capacity to resettle people when we are talking about a million who have reached germany. wewe have to build that infrastructure, other means. >> we are talking about 11 million refugees. >> 20 million. >> i believe 11 is the figure for the region and you are saying the capacity is at 100,000. >> to take them from they're safely to other countries. you don't have to take 11 million. most people want to stay close to home but in order to do that they have to go to school, have water, housing. lebanon and jordan did not have the resources.
>> this goes back to the question of preparedness. like most of foreign-policy everything is crisis management, everything is crisis management. strategy is almost vanished. what we discover was not only were we intellectually unprepared but operationally and prepared. in order to be operationally prepared in may be we have to have a defense budget of a certain kind of various assets, assets, stuff in place in case the weather gets bad. and certainly anyone who has looked at syria in the last four years did not have to be a rocket science to predict the weather was going to get bad but we were not prepared. >> before we all sink in the total despair. >> totally appropriate. >> go ahead and sink in the total despair. i think that ii should open up for some questions, although -- good.
>> what did this safe zones look like if the safe sons were to be graded? how would they work and be enforced and what is the argument against them? >> as far as i can tell there are questions of taking out, people like to say missile-defense systems. it is much harder, but it is impossible for me to believe, impossible for me to believe that we lack the military capabilities to create zones. we can argue about the size, argue about the location. they have views about where they want them and not want
them, but as a matter of principle and as a matter of feasibility if you look at the map or not even talking about large swaths of territory. we're just talking about some safe places. a lot of the people who would have lived there got on the votes. and one of the things we needed to do was to give them reasons not to stay on the boat and even reasons to believe that the solution to their problem may be repatriation. unfortunately given the foreign-policy that the west adopted toward the syrian, it was almost inconceivable to think of repatriation as a solution to this particular crisis. but there was a time, there was a time wherea time where if you protected people and give them a haven that we could have gone a differenta different way which they would have much preferred obviously. >> there you go. >> arguments in favor. >> do we have a microphone for these two gentlemen?
>> jakubowski, unaffiliated private citizen. maybe peter could answer for annemarie, but i was intrigued when she said the political solution that she saw that was going to happen. i'm wondering if the call is for usa sod to go doesn't that mean they would have to submit to sunni domination and isn't that essentially an existential crisis? >> would anybody here like to take that? >> it is conceivable that they themselves would desert. they believe he did not stand a chance of survival and it is conceivable under certain conditions that coalitions two or three years ago might have been formed. we let this fester so long that it looks increasingly impossible. the russian move which is the most breathtaking thing that has happened in a long
time now makes things even more complicated. the fact is that the regime has now and has always enjoyed the support of russia, hezbollah, and iran. they have enjoyed the support of saudi arabia and qatar and insofar as there were or are moderate elements they have enjoyed the support of nobody, nobody. and so we are where we are. which is why i think that a political solution in syria will not be possible unless the battlefield the name exchanges. forgive me, but obama keeps saying there is not a military solution. he is right. the only way to a diplomatic solution is through a change on the battlefield.
in order to enact that you have to provide weapons to people who will do so. the same thing in ukraine. we have argued for giving lethal aid to the ukrainian army it is not because we think they will march in the moscow or that they can defeat the russian army that the military cost of britain's invasions may be raised to a point where a political solution may become possible. that these are the kind of considerations that have not loomed large or at all which is why i think a political solution is necessary. if the security of my own family were at stake, if i were one of those poor people i would not wait for aa political solution to look after my family. there feeling seems to me exactly the right one, exactly the right one. >> i know thisi know this is heresy, but we keep saying there has to be both a military and simultaneously a diplomatic political gain on the ground, but by repeating endlessly that a sod must go we are really foreclosing a transition. no oneno one is advocating that a sod be the long-term solution. >> russia.
>> okay. russia. but no right thinking person. >> no one you would break bread with. >> right. okay. >> i would like to add, when we say we need a political solution, that is a concept that cannot be imposed. we have no blueprint here. no one can read from one day to the other end use of political solution. the effort underway is to start a political process which will be cumbersome and difficult and fraught with setbacks, but the intention is to bring all of the syrian players together with the exception of terrorist groups and back that effort by the external powers that have an influence. with the process the secretary kerry so
courageously initiated has brought about is that there are all of the countries at the same table including russia and including iran, including saudi arabia, including some regional adjacent companies and europeans to devise how they can back and foster the syrian political process. >> but we have got to tell the full -- we have got to have the full picture. iran is not just sitting at the table. they are arming a sod. the battle is going to be fought on behalf of a sod by iraqi shia, lebanese soldiers from hezbollah, and iranian soldiers under the command of an iranian general covered by russian air power. so we have to be clear. it
isclear. it is not just that there is a table in vienna. of these very actors who are sitting there are busy doing the opposite of diplomatic work on the ground. >> if you want to have a litmus test for whether it will work ask yourself whether the refugees -- think about a political solution, whether the refugees will go back to syria. the starting point is that we don't want to let the fighting go on, ten years like a lebanese civil war that lasted 15 years. all syria will be depleted and no one will be there and there will just be victims, so we don't want that. we tried a very complicated thing, the political process. again, here they have a role.a role. they are part and parcel of syria and they are minority, but they have a place there.
so the us odd question is, of course, an an important one. everyone knows there will be no sustainable, peaceful future of syria in the long run with a sod, but it would be wrong to say a sod has to go before we start a political process. >> we have been saying that for four years that a sod has to go before any negotiation, thereby guaranteeing that he will fight to the last syrian to keep himself in office. >> if we -- we don't have to go into this more. if we had three or four years ago denied in control of the skies and destroyed his helicopters, a sod must go would not have turned into the fantastical proposition. proposition. we are not talking in the case of a sod or isys about military superpowers. this is not what we are talking about.
these are objectives that can be accomplished but we must be willing to use the means to accomplish certain ends. we should talk about the refugees. >> leave you with a little bit of hope. >> chris davis retired foreign service officer returning to the context of europe, there is a quid pro quo with turkey in terms of its eventual membership to the european union or closer association with the european union. the implications of that with respect to the issues that the eu are having to face right now. >> do you want to take that on? >> the charts have been seen and continue to be seen as the key to solving the crisis part of the problem. several thousand people every day. i said earlier,i said
earlier, they focused on the wrong problem initially. initially it was libya and it turned out the situation in turkey was more dire. it has been negotiating fiercely in terms of what it wants, solution to the problem was favorable. turkish citizens can travel to the opening up it is not clear what turkey can deliver. and i think that in order for that to be realized, the goal of slowing down there has to be a commitment from europe to take hundreds of thousands of refugees from the region and the europe and there has to be a commitment for the rest of the world to take several hundred thousand more from the region and then i think that is the key issue. turkey will want to see the
funding that it wants, the status that he craves there is now a commitment to biannual. >> both of you, you were correct in pointing out that in each of the recent european crises they use was exposed as being weak command after these crises and when i look now the refugee crisis, what is no longer clear to me, my question to you, why is the eu necessary for the solution of these crises, and why my given all of the threats that the various europeans are facing and all that must be done for why must, why must the preservation of the eu known large in terms of priority? the things we keep seeing is that in crisis that nationstates tends to bay like themselves.
i am not going to get into questions of national character that there pursuing their own interest with their own constituencies with strikes me as one form of normal. so i asked, why should i not give up on the eu? why is it necessary for a solution? >> i have an answer. the eu is one of the most important piece projects in the history of europe. >> over the last centuries we have managed to forge a union out 28 sovereign nations that devolve some of their sovereignty to the union, but it brought piece to europe we have a transfer
union, the eastern european countries are far better off than they used to be. it's not part of the european union, but the danger and the challenges, there is now a tendency for re- nationalization which can be toxic. and there we have to have a coalition of strong leaders in europe and the european union that can contain the tendency to re- nationalize, someone who will be willing also to sacrifice a lot of things and we can preserve this great piece project. >> now, of course, one of the proudest achievements, border free europe is in jeopardy as one after the other countries are building walls around themselves.
so it is -- it really is a perilous moment, and i would like to thank ambassador wittig and you, gregory and people i would like to think knew america for hosting this conference on what is obviously an urgent and troubling >> today, the atlantic council takes a look at pakistan's nuclear arsenal and how the international community should address concerns over the program. a panel of or and policy experts are part of the discussion. we have it live at 3:30 p.m. mexico's foreign minister is in washington today. she speaks at the migration policy institute.
that is live at 4:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. up next on c-span, a senate hearing on combating isis. followed by q&a with an author discussing her book on the relationship between lyndon and lady bird johnson. and live at 7:00 a.m., the washington journal. >> defense secretary ashton carter and joint chiefs of staff were on capital this past week to testify on the u.s. strategy for combating isis. spoke about coalition partners, authorization for military force and the threat of self radicalization. this hearing is three hours.